"My "favorite" tactic is when they try to justify overall poor long term performance with the "great" dividends the investors are getting (often subsidised by ROC), as though total return doesn't matter."

There's one particular author in the Closed-End Funds section that will get angry if you point out that an Eaton Vance fund has devalued significantly. His usual response is something akin to trying to convince readers that they should be glad that Eaton Vance gave them some of that money back in dividends, despite the most recent dividend cut.

I didn't find Mr. Fabian's article to be of that mold. At least it presented a couple options to research.

Detroit's problems are self-imposed because the city is run by idiots. Look at the Detroit city council's website, and you'll see why they're going bankrupt. Only one city council person even acknowledges that there's a financial problem.

One particular council person states he wants to "conduct projects", establish a gambling addiction program, improve parks, "finance special activities and programs", increase funding for the police department, and purchase new gear for the fire department.

Another council person's stated priorities are to "ensure effective allocation of STATE and FEDERAL funds", "enact safe centers", "adopt universal health care policies, low-cost prescriptions for seniors and a plan to win FEDERAL dollars", fund drug prevention programs, and finally... to make sure that city contracts are awarded to black people.

They are totally oblivious to the fact that there is no money. Instead of tightening the budget, they indulge in spending like there's no tomorrow, and seek funding from state and federal sources. They should feel embarrassed that there's talk of the state taking over their mismanaged city, but they aren't. They're too busy salivating over the idea of spending someone else's money on their pet projects. The voters of Detroit are getting exactly what they deserve, and the rest of the tax payers will have to bail out this enclave of stupidity. Good thing for them that the state taxpayers will eventually bail them and their pet projects out. Because otherwise, nobody in his right mind would buy their bonds.

I didn't buy my shares from your specifically chosen time of "October 2011 on". I bought them before. You were extolling the virtues of EXG in your articles before that specific time you mentioned. You know - back when EXG's share price was double digits (and not less than $9/share like it closed today).

It's hard to believe this lousy stock IPO'd at $20/share, and has been cutting its distribution ever since.

"I've been a big proponent of most of the Eaton Vance option-income funds since I began writing on Seeking Alpha in early 2011 and though it took awhile for them to get going, investors who took my advice I believe would say they have been well rewarded."

I took your advice on EXG and have considerable losses to show for it. I would not say I have NOT been well rewarded.

I have to agree with GlobalTrekker. I hold a couple of the Eaton Vance funds listed, as well as buy-write funds from other companies. I have held all of these funds for several years, and nearly all of them have performed terribly. Take a look at the IPO price on these funds, as well as the dividend/distribution history. That tells the story.

I bought these buy-write CEFs thinking exactly what you said - that it is a convenient way to gain income from options without having to write options myself. I bought them mainly because of the purported quality holdings, the discount to NAV, and the high yield. But nearly all my buy-write CEFs lost money on a total return basis (particularly my Eaton Vance funds), with few exceptions. While I still hold a handful of these CEFs, I will not buy any more. I've lost enough money already on these type of funds.

BB10 won't be amazing, that's being telegraphed by all the delays. if they do manage to get something out in the first quarter of 2013, which is looking more unlikely all the time, it will likely be sub-par. because, you know, that large volume of code is hard to integrate. if all the best QNX programmers are working on it, as you say they are, then they're terrible programmers.

the idea that anyone would pay $15/share for RIM is pie-in-the-sky wishing. why would anyone pay more than double the current share price?

Research In Motion (RIMM) might hawk its BlackBerry business to Amazon (AMZN) or Facebook (FB); sell or open up its messaging systems to Apple (AAPL) or Google (GOOG); or keep the company whole and sell a large stake to Microsoft (MSFT), Sunday Times says ($$). For now, keep an eye on Q1 earnings this week. [View news story]